Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1984/05/15 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Tuesday, May 15, 1984 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Mayor Cox, Councilmembers Scott, Malcolm, Moore, McCandl iss Councilmembers absent: None Staff present: City Manager Goss, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Assistant City Manager Asmus PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Cox followed by a moment of silent prayer. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES for the meetings of April 19, and May 8, 1984 MSUC ( Mal col m/Moore ) to approve the minutes. Counc i 1 woman McCandl i ss abstained from voting on the minutes of April 19. Mayor Cox abstained from voting on the minutes of May 8. Both were not present at those particular meeti rigs. 2. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY UNANIMOUS CONSENT ITEM RESOLUTION ll618 COMMENDING GLENN FULLER ON HIS 80TH BIRTHDAY Mr. Fuller will be celebrating his 80th birthday on Saturday, May 19, 1984. A reception is planned in his honor. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. a. PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF MAY 20-26, 1984 AS "NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK" (City Engineer/Acting Director of Public Works Operations) National Public Works Week recognizes the efforts of the private sector and public agencies in providing national public infrastructure for the nation to carry on its business. The Proclamation was presented to City Engineer Li ppi tt. b. PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OF MAY 1984 AS "CALIFORNIA NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH" MONTH The Proclamation was presented to "McGruff" {Pol ice Department "mascot" ). City Council Meeting - 2 - May 15, lg84 c. PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING KU~Y 13-1g, 1984 "NATIONAL POLICE WEEK" The Proclamtion was presented to "McGruff" (Police Department "mascot"). d. PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF MAY 14-20, 1984 AS "GIRLS CLUB WEEK" The Proclamation was presented to Marie Miehls, Director of the Girls Club and accepted by two members of the Girls Club. 3. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a. PRESENTATION OF THE OLYMPIC FLAG (Coca-Cola Bottling Company) Mr. Don Carson, Sales Promotion Manager of the Coca-Cola BOttling Company presented the City with an official Olympic Flag. b. REQUEST TO ALLEVIATE PARKING PROBLEM ALONG THIRD AVENUE (Nuts Over Yogurt) The merchants of Park Plaza at the Village requested a solution to alleviate the parking problem. They recommended all parking meters between "F" Street and the United Artists Sixplex be removed and replaced with signs in.dicating a parking twenty minute time 1 imit, in addition to having the curb painted to indicate this restriction. MSUC (Malcolm/Moore) to refer this to the Parking Place Commission and the Downtown Committee for review and recommendation. Council discussion foll owed regarding the parking survey. City Managaer Goss stated it is scheduled for completion six months after the opening of the parking structure and the structure has been open now for one month. The Council indicated that the parking should be looked at right away because of the parking problem in this vicinity. c. RESIGNATION OF JOE NAVARRA FROM HANDYTRANS COMMITTEE The Chula Vista E1 derly and Handicapped Transportation Advisory Committee (HandYtrans) have requested another individual be appointed to their committee to replace Joe Navarra who has moved out of the state. They further recommended Doris Blackman of Starlight be considered for appointment. MSUC (McCandliss/Scott) to accept the resignation with regret and a letter of appreciation be sent to Mr. Navarra for his services on this committee. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 5. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION TO REZONE 3.75 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TELEGRA.DH CANYON ROAD AND MELROSE FROM R-1 TO R-3-P-14 - ALANDA BACH (Continued from the meeting of May 1, 1984) (Planning Director) City Council Meeting - 3 - May 15, 1984 ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.OlO OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE REZONING 3.75 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD AND MELROSE AVENUE FROM R-1 TO R-3-P-14 - FIRST READING This item was continued from the City Council meeting of May 1, 1984 at the request of the residents in the vicinity of the property to allow their privately retained engineer to review the proposed development. The residents also raised questions regarding the specific traffic impact the project would have on "L" Street. This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox opened the public hearing. Director of Planning Krempl explained this is a request to fezone 3.7 acres located at the southwest corner of Telegraph Canyon and Melrose from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to R-3-P-14 (Multiple Family Residential subject to a Precise Plan at a density of 14 dwelling-units per net acre). The Planning Commission adopted the Negative Declaration on IS-84-20 and recommended approval of the request for the rezoning to R-3-P-14 in accordance with their Resolution PCZ-4-5. Director Krempl presented slides showing the location of the vacant parcel, the topography, adjacent land uses in the area, and the egress/ingress into the property. He noted the petitions and the -- letters received in opposition to the project. The opposition was based on the additional traffic which would be generated; impact on the schools; and the impact it would have on their single family development. Mr. Krempl stated staff had considered all arguments for and against and concluded the rezoning of the property would outweigh the arguments against. Development of the vacant land would complete the street improvements and it would improve traffic safety in the area. The 14 units per acre is consistent with the General Plan and the recommendation is to approve the rezoning with the attachment of the P-Precise Plan Modifying District. Council discussion followed with staff answering questions pertaining to: traffic capacity on Telegraph Canyon Road; whether the property can be developed with low and moderate income housing and receive a density bonus; the density for a rezoning as compared to that on the General Plan; noise factors and the impact; the amount of landscaping which would create a buffer for the property; ingress and egress out of this property and the traffic safety encountered; the amount of units if developed with single family rather than multiple family(zoning); the accidents which have occurred in the area; the difference between "spot-zoning" and "in-filling". Speaking in support were Mr. Stan Landis, 2341 Jefferson Street, San Diego, a general partner of Alanda Bach. He stated this property was an "in-fill" site and the pattern of the area was resolved at the time the area was developed. The area already has all the improvements plus the schools, and the density as proposed is consistent with the General Plan. Mr. Landis stated they are adhering to the height limitation (two stories) and have met with staff and the Traffic Engineer to resolve the problems of ingress and egress onto this property. City Council Meeting - 4 - May 15, 1984 Mr. Mike Jones, 2470 Union Street, San Diego, architect for this project stated it is a transition project from the high density. project to the east and the single family developments to the west. He noted the amount of landscaping on the property, paving, percentage of units and the amenities being offered. In answer to Council's questions, Mr. Jones stated the shingles would be a dark grey asphalt with blue sidings on the buildings. It will be built as condominiums with a Homeowner's Association. Every unit will be 1,120 square feet, two bedrooms, two baths. Speaking in support was Donna Ecoffey, 207 East E1 Capitan Drive, Chula Vista, and Don Brinkman, 879 Monserate, Chula Vista. They stated (1) the property has deteriorated for the past 25 years; (2) aliens, fires, dumping grounds, and motorcycles are problems connected with the property and rocks have been thrown onto their lots and police have had to be called. They both urged support of the request and opposition of any proposed pedestrian walkway. Speaking in opposition was Peter Hayes, 6134 Parkside, San Diego representing five property owners along Melrose Avenue. Mr. Hayes stated that: (1) the area is zoned R-1 and the people in the neighborhood wish it to remain that; (2) the residents have achieved a socio-economic status; (3) of the nearly 400+ homes in the area, only four have sold in the last several months; (4) it is not compatible for multiple family development; (5) challenging the · -- environmental issues because there will be an impact on air, pollution, traffic, noise and odor from this particular complex; (6) submitted traffic studies dating back to 1970 regarding a traffic signalization on Melrose and East "L" Street; (7) noted the petition submitted to the Planning Commission signed by 227 residents in the area. Mr. Jim Tesch, 102 E1 Capitan Dr., Chula Vista and Mr. Bob Norman, 908 Mission Avenue, Chula Vista, both spoke in opposition citing the traffic and the general impact this would have on the single family residential area. In answer to Council's question, City Engineer Lippitt cited the vehicles per day traveling along "L" Street and Telegraph Canyon Road beginning 1978-1983. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Council discussion ensued regarding: (1) the difficulty with reconciling the site as a R-1 project; (2) the project appears to be well designed; (3) discussed spot-zoning and in-filling; (4) the traffic which would be generated and presently existing on Melrose, Myra and Maria Way; (5) the dead-end streets going into this project; (6) the need for a stop sign at Telegraph Canyon Road and Mel rose; (7) the people immediately adjacent to the property have less concerns and are supporting the project than those that live at a distance; (8) The City Council has control with the "P" Modifier; (9) the concerns with the people from this project traveling out to Telegraph Canyon Road; (lO) could support something with lesser density such as a Townhouse development. City Council Meeting - 5 - May 15, 1984 MSUC (Cox/Malcolm) to adopt the Negative Declaration. MS(Cox/Malcolm) to place the ordinance on its first reading. Council discussion of the motion followed with the Councilmembers expressing their comments regarding the density and traffic. Councilman Malcolm suggested a postponement for staff to get more information regarding questions raised this evening. SUBSTITUTE MOTION MSUC (Malcolm/Moore) to reopen the public hearing and to continue this item for four weeks (to June 12,) in order for the staff (citizens and/or applicant) to provide more information on the following: the cost of the off-site improvements being required; the design of the driveways; having a three-way stop-sign (Melrose and Telegraph Canyon Road) and the pros and cons on that; to refer this item to the Safety Commission for a review; density; pros and cons regarding pedestrian access; access onto Tel egraph Canyon Road and how staff plans on all eviating City Council's concerns. The Council recessed at 9:20 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 9:30 p.m. 6. PUBLIC HEARING PCZ 84-E CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL TO REZONE 1.13 ACRES LOCATED AT 309 AND 315 SEA VALE STREET FROM R-1 TO R-3-P-13 - DAVID P. DAVIES (Planning Director) This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox opened the public hearing. Principal Planner Lee submitted slides explaining that on April ll, 1984, the Planning Commission considered the request to fezone the property located at 309 Sea Vale Street from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to R-3-P-13 (Multiple Family Residential) subject to a precise plan at the density of 13 dwelling units per acre. ~so considered at the time was the rezoning of the property located at 315 Sea Vale Street which was included in the request in order to create a logical zone boundary. The applicant has submitted a preliminary plan for the development of the 0.94 acre parcel. The proposed development is a 12-unit condominium project consisting of two 6-unit structures. The failure to approve time request by the Planning Commission constituted a denial of the request; therefore, an appeal was filed for the matter to be considered by the City Council. After weighing all arguments presented by the residents and its own study of the request, the Planning Department is recommending the request be denied. City Council Meeting - 6 - May 15, 1984 Mr. Lee noted a letter just received from Judy Johnson, Woodbridge, Virginia, stating they are the owners of the property at 315 Sea Vale and object to the rezoning. This evening, a letter was received from Robert Brath stating he is a true owner of the property with escrow completed todd. Speaking in favor of the request was Mr. David Davies, 132 East 28th Street, National City, who introduced Mr. Corey Breininger, 9535 Mission Gorge Rd, Suite "G", Santee, the architect. Mr. Breininger showed slides noting the quality of the environment proposed; the requirement of the architectural design; the sensitivity of the project to the neighborhood; the four buildings will be set back lO0 feet from the street; it provides a landscaping buffer between the project and the residential area; landscaping is equivalent to two R-1 lots; the 24 parking spaces will not be seen from Sea Vale Street; the applicant has met with many of the residents in the area to explain the project. Mr. Lane Cole, Registered Engineer, 273 Coralwood Court, Chula Vista, noted the slides he gave to the Planning Department were not the ones being shown this evening. Mayor Cox asked Mr. Lee to get the proper sl ides for Mr. Cole's presentation. Mr. Cole reviewed and commented on the arguments submitted against the project stating the R-1 is an intrusion into the R-3 zone and not vice-versa. He noted the difference in the elevation; discussed the down-zoning in 1978 of the property which would have allowed 28 units and/or a cluster concept; the extensive landscaping proposed for the complex; it is a good buffer, the property should be developed to its highest and best use; the applicants will be preserving much of the vegetation; there will be no real increase in the traffic; there is no site distance problem coming up from Third Avenue to the project. Mr. Jim Federhart, 5252 Balboa, San Diego, Traffic Engineer for the past 35 years stated he studied the area and took a traffic count on April 6, noting 75 vehicles traveling Sea Vale in one ilour's time this would amount to approximately 700 cars per day. Since 1980, only three accidents occured on this street and they have been single car accidents; a centerline stripe is proposed to be painted on Sea Vale; there is good site distance from Third Avenue to the project onto Sea Vale; the project will have no significant impact on the traffic. Mrs. Dorothy Davies, 309 Sea Vale, Chula Vista, stated she has lived there for 46 years and her property has always been considered a "buffer". She feels it is not intruding into the R-1 neighborhood since the project will have a "park" setting. Speaking in opposition were Stepehn Sokil, 282 Sea Vale Street, Mr. Newton Chaney, 292 Sea Vale, Carol Smith, 275 Sea Vale, Carole Will jams, 299 Sea Vale, Susan Watry, 81 Second Avenue, Peter Watry, 81 Second Avenue, Arthur Harrington, 260 Sea Vale, Robert Bush, 235 Sea Vale, Donald Stell, 210 Sea Val e. City Council Meeting - 7 - May 15, 1984 In summary, their opposition was: 1. The project will downgrade the properties in the area. 2. It will have a "domino effect" because many of the vacant properties in the area will want the same rezoning. 3. It is an R-1 neighborhood and the residents wish it to remain as such. 4. Growth is not necessarily progress. 5. It is a dangerous intersection - anyone coming up Third Avenue to make the left turn onto the property will face a traffic hazard. 6. Council should modify the General Plan for the density. 7. There is this "dangerous curve" going down to third avenue. 8. Over lO0 people have signed the petition against the rezoning. 9. The people feel secure they are living in a single family residential area. 10. There have been as many near accidents occurring on this street whicim have not been reported to the police. ll. In 1972, Mr. Lane Cole, when he was the City's Public Works Director, tried to have Second Avenue developed as a four-1 ane thoroughfare. 12. Noted'the slide presentation showing the topography and elevation of the project. 13. Noted the Planning Department's efforts to rezone the properties several years ago, as a transitional neighborhood. 14. Noted time many times the City Council has supported tile residents in the area in their concerns against rezoning and other developments occurring in the area. 15. Near accidents some of them have had in avoiding collisions with cars coming down at that intersection. 16. Noted tile historical background of some of the homes in that area. 17. Children walking along this area will be faced with this additional traffic generated. 18. The contemporary Spanish architecture proposed is not in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. 19. Noted the comments were from concerned residents of the area and not "paid professionals". City Council Meeting - 8 - May 15, 1984 Mr. Ray Yoder,296 Sea Vale Street real estate broker, stated he lives in the area, has no financial interest and does support the rezoning. There being no further comments, either for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. Council discussion followed regarding the "domino effect"; the approval the rezoning would have on the area; consolidation of other lots for multiple family development; the pro osal to put a stop sign on Sea Vale Street; concerns with down-grading t~e properties in 1976; the Planning Commission's 3-2 vote with two members absent; the concern with the density being allowed; concern with including the property at 315 Sea Vale since its location retains the R-1 atmosphere of the area. MSC (Cox/Malcolm) to refer this matter back to the Planning Commission to consider rezoning the property to R-3-P-13. Assistant City Attorney Gill stated the Planning Commission has 40 days to report back to the City Council and at that time the ordinance to fezone the property will be put on the agenda. MSUC (Scott/Malcolm) for the Planning Commission to consider deleting the R-3 parcel at the southern portion of the area (315 Sea Vale). MSUC (Malcolm/Cox) to refer the traffic problems to the Safety Commission for a report back at the same time this comes back to the City Council. MSUC (Cox/Moore) for the staff to look into the street lights on Sea Vale Street, curbs and sidewalks which may be in a state of disrepair. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (None) CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 7-9) MSUC (Moore/McCandliss) to approve the Consent Calendar. 7. RESOLUTION 11619 ACCEPTING THE WORK ON THE INSTALLATION OF A FIRE ALARM SYSTE)i FOR THE LIBRARY, PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING AND CITY HALL (Director of Building and Housing) F. H. Barth Co., Inc. has completed the installation of the fire alarm system in the City Hall, Public Services Building and Library. This work was completed on April 27, 1984. A final inspection was made by the Fire Marshal and communications personnel of the Building and Housing Department. All work has been performed in accordance with the plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Building and Housing. The total project cost is $29,990. City Council Meeting - 9 - May 15, 1984 8. RESOLUTION 11620 ACCEPTING THE WORK ON THE REROOFING OF CITY HALL AND FIRE STATION NO. 1 (Director of Building and Housing) On November 8, 1983, the City Council awarded a contract to E.A. Brown Roofing Company, San Diego in the amount of $69,696 for removing the mission-tile roof, installing a new underlayment and replacing the mission-til e. The work has been com~ eted and inspected by the Building and Housing Department and found to be satisfactory. The total project cost is $77,586. 9. ORDINANCE 2069 AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 5.58.060 - CLARIFYING THAT THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT DOES NOT APPLY TO EMERGENCY TOWS - FIRST READING (Continued from the meeting of May 8, 19841 (City Attorney) At its meeting of May 8, 1984, the City Council considered a proposed amendment to the Municipal Code relating to notice requirements for towing automobiles to make it clear the notice did not apply in emergency situations. The action of the Council was deletion of the entire section from the Municipal Code. End of Consent Calendar RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES, FIRST REAbING lO. RESOLUTION 11621 APPROVING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BEll~EEN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SWEETWATER RIVER FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL (City Engineer) The City of Chula Vista has supported the construction of the Sweetwater River F1 ood Control Channel for nearly 20 years. During this period, the County of San Diego, City of National City, U.S. Corps of Engineers, San Diego Unified Port District and Chula Vista officials have worked in a cooperative effort to bring about project implementation. The proposed agreement is a significant step towards the construction of the project. This agreement between the County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista provides the mechanics for project construction, administration and payment of future maintenance costs. Chula Vista's share of this project has been estimated to be about $1.5 million ($1.35 million reimbursable and $142,850 non-reimbursable). Legislation is now pending that would provide for 100% State financing of local reimbursable flood control costs. No fund appropriations have occurred, however. The City's reimbursement co.st of about 1.35 million would be due and payable lO years after project completion in the event that no State funds are actually appropriated. In answer to Council's query, Mr. Lippitt explained the cost to the City and the agreement of Cal trans to lend the money interest free for a period of ten years. The money will then be reimbursed by the Department of Water Resources. City Council Meeting - 10 - May 15, 1984 ll. RESOLUTION 11622 APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF CHULA VISTA BAYFRONT STATION (City Engineer) A tri-party agreement among the City of Chula Vista, the ~tropelitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) and the County of San Diego for development of the Chula Vista "E" Street Trolley Station (hereinafter referred to as the Chula Vista Bayfront Station) was approved by the MTDB on January 24, 1983, by the City of Chula Vista on January 25, 1983, and by the County of San Diego on March 1, 1983. This tri-party agreement is a cooperative effort that previously defines issues pertaining to planning of the station. This new agreement addresses issues pertaining to station construction, maintenance and operation. Under this agreement, the County of San Diego and City of Chula Vista will share equally in the cost of constructing, operating, and maintaining the Bayfront Station. County and City also will share equally in any revenue generated from the facility. Councilman Scott expressed his displeasure with the lack of participation by the MTDB. Councilman Moore noted tile storage track and questioned the potential cost from MTDB because the station will have to be built over the tracks. hlr. Jaswant Kooner, representing the County of San Diego Department of Publ ic Works stated MTDB would not be moving the storage track and the building will be designed around it. MTDB will not be sharing the cost of moving the track. Councilman ~4oore indicated there is still the potential for relocating the public works yard. He suggested the staff start action on that. City Manager Goss noted there is money in the CIP budget for this. CONTINUED MATTERS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 12. RESOLUTION 11623 AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 263 LANDIS AVENUE AND APPROPRIATING $105,600 FROM THE PARKING METER FUND FOR SAID PURCHASE (Continued from the meeting of hiay 8, 1984) (Community Development Director) On October 18, 1983, City Council authorized negotiation for the purchase of a parcel of property located at 263 Landis Avenue. Negotiation with the owner has been completed and a conditional escrow opened with Ticor Title insurance Company. The purchase of the subject property for use as a 17-space parking lot is a C1 ass (11 ) exemption from environmental review. City Council Meeting - ll - May 15, 1984 The recommendation was that the City Council appropriate $105,600 from the Parking Meter Fund, and authorize the submittal of the Purchase Agreement/Escrow instructions and Grant Deed into an escrow account for the purchase of the subject property. This item was continued from the meeting of May 8, 1984 for a full Council. Councilman Scott stated he would like to go on record as "stating there is absolutely no need for the purchase of this property". RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with Councilman Scott voting "no". 13. REPORT CONSIDERATION OF ROOF MATERIAL FOR THE WINDjAMMER CONDOMINIUMS (Continued from the meeting of April lO, 1984) (Planning Director) RESOLUTION 11624 APPROVING ROOFING MATERIALS FOR THE WINDJAMMER CONDOMINIUMS (LOTS 324 AND 325 OF HIDDEN VISTA VILLAGE) Meyor cox stated he is abstai.i.g d.e co..ict of i.terest. Mayor Cox left the dais at this time and u Tempore Moore presided over this segment of the meeting. On April lO, 1984, the City Council considered the revised development plans for the Windjammer Condominium project consisting of lO0 units on lots 324 and 325 of the Hidden Vista Village subdivision. The City Council approved the project subject to approval of the composition asphal t roofing material by the Design Review Committee and the City Council. The Design Review Committee recommended approval of the roofing material consisting of composition asphalt shingles or equivalent materials for the Windjammer project; endorsed the use of such roofing material in the vicinity of the project; left the color selection of the roofing material to the developer unless it is determined to be substantially different from the sam~ es presented, in which case the matter is being brought to City Council for determination. Councilman Malcolm questioned Council reserving the right to approve the color scheme. Director of Planning Krempl stated the Council does have that prerogative. MSC (Malcolm/McCandliss) to approve the report. Mayor Cox abstained from voting on this item. COUNCILMAN MALCOLM OFFERED THE RESOLUTION, the reading of the text was waived with unanimous consent, passed and approved with Mayor Cox abstaining. 14. REPORT OF THE CITY MANAGER (none) City Council Meeting - 12 - May 15, 1984 15. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Cox suggested due to the lateness of the hour (12 midnight), a continuation of the rest of the items. · .~ MSUC (Cox/Moore) to continue Mayor's Report and Council Comments to a Council meeting following the Redevelopment Agency meeting scheduled for Thursday, May 17, at 7 p.m. at ~hich time he will also be requesting a Closed Session I~ for 1 i ti gation purposes. 16. COUNCIL COMMENTS(Continued to 5/17/84 meeting). / a. REPORT PROPOSITIONS 18 AND 19 ON JUNE STATE PRIMARY BALLOT ( Legi sl ati ve Committee) At the April 24, 1984 City Council meeting, Mayor Cox made reference to Propositions 18 and 19 regarding wild life habitats, which will be on the June ballot. Council requested the Legislative Committee look at these two bond issues and report back. At the meeting of May 1, Mayor Cox stated the League endorsed propositions 18 and 19. Councilman Malcolm stated he would obtain a report from the Coastal Commission regarding their recommendations and report back to Council. (Continued to 5/17/84 meeting). ADJOURn. lENT AT 12:00 p.m. to the meeting scheduled for May 17 following the Redevelopment Agency meeting; to the Council Conference scheduled for Saturday, May 19, 1984 AT 8:30 a. m. and to the regularly scheduled meeting of May 22, 1984 at 7 p.m. WPG: 0430C PAG iI STATE OF CALIFOPaIA ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING ORDER COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss OF ADJOUP~NMENT OF MEETING CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, Jennie M. Fulasz, being first duly swo~ depose and say =: That I a t~he duly chosen, qualified and acting City Clerk of the City Co~cil of the City of Chula Vista; That the re.qu]a~ meeting of the Council of the City of Chula Vista was held luesday, May ]5, ]984 and said meeting was adjou. z~ed to the time and place specified in the order of adjournment ATTACHED HE~3ETO: That on Wednesday, May ]6, 1984 at ~he hour of 9:00 a.m. I posted a copy of said order at a conspicuous place on or near the door of the place at which said me&ting of May ]5, ]984 was held. StYscribed and sworn to before me this day of 19 Notary PLLbliC in and for said County and State of California MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Tuesday, May ]5, ]984 The City Council met in the Council Chamber at the Public Services Building, 276"Fourth Avenue on the above date at 7:00 p.m. with the following Councilmen present: Cox, Moore, McCandliss, Scott, Malcolm Councilmen absent: None ADJOURNMENT The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 12:00 a.m. until Thursday, May ]7, ]984 after Redeve~ency 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. I, Jennie M. Fulasz, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that this is a full, true and correct copy of an order by the City Council at the meeting of May ]5, ]984 IE M. FULASZ RK City of Chula Vista, California